To feel that the reasons some children don't do well at school, isn't because they don't try hard enough?

'equates education with better outcomes'

What if the education given (as in a lot of UK state secondary schools right now) is crap?

I agree that we need to value education for our children. But I've seen schools that are like prisons, making children take sick bags to lessons, rather than phoning parents to take them home. Schools unable to recruit, due to the teacher retention crisis, resulting in supply teacher after supply teacher. Uncontrolled behaviour issues, leaving the rest of the class totally unable to concentrate on their work. Unsupported children with SEN. THOSE are some of the reasons why their children don’t / won’t try in schools.

We, as a nation and as a culture, need to value education enough and hold our politicians to account, for funding and providing GREAT education for children. Not berating children when they're not able to access it.

DC2 didn't do as well at school as they should have done due to undiagnosed dyslexia and ADHD. The school threw me off the scent by running some screening tests and they all came back normal. DC2 couldn't have put in more effort.

Similar for me - I underperformed in subjects like English Literature due to undiagnosed autism. I am extremely bad at reading between the lines to this day.

I'm in a weird position on this one. I did fantastically well at school - top grades the whole way through, picture in the paper for my final results, awards for the highest grade in my county in a particular exam - and looking back I can't for the life of me figure out why I bothered. I don't think it was a waste of time as such, but there was just no need for it, really. I could have got much lower results and I'd still be me and probably still be doing what I'm doing now.

I did well at school because my brain is suited to the way school works - I had a great memory, I was a fast reader and I could recall facts in a sequence. Put a gun to my head now and I could probably recall little or nothing of what I learned. I don't think school gave me any great skills or knowledge really - I learned some useful things at uni but I learned the most useful skills through work.

My DS is like me - focused on getting good results, hard on himself when he doesn't do as well as he hoped -and I don't know what to say to him. I should be encouraging and validate his effort but in fact I feel like saying 'just do the bare minimum, it'll be fine.' Memorising loads of history facts doesn't improve you as a person. It does give you access to some specific experiences - say, studying at a particular uni - but it you're not fussed about that then the benefit is very limited. It makes sense to get whatever grade you need to do whatever it is you want to do next. If you're going to be a building apprentice then there's no point in getting a 7 in geography, unless you're really into it.

In an ideal world I'd love for young people to do things that they enjoy and do well at because they are genuinely interested, rather than having to sit for hours and force facts into their brain so they can regurgitate them in an exam. I know that's not doable in practical terms, unfortunately. But I think a sensible approach to school - as in, this is what you have to do but it's not the be all and end all - is worth having.

@sacredblue

Our school system is set up almost entirely for kids who are academic. That is a very narrow skill set.

Nail on the head. Ever since grammars and sec moderns were scrapped and replaced by "comps", this has been the case as comps are basically moulded around academic subjects, with barely just lip-service to "manual" skills. Kids who aren't academic are just left to fester and become disengaged and disruptive which affects everyone around them.

Then of course, we had Blair and his obsession with 50% going to Uni, which is, again, obsessing about academic students, and the dismantling of adult education and training in "the trades" and manual skills has left the other 50% floundering again.

The whole system from primary, through to secondary and beyond into FE and HE is all prioritised towards the academic with just scraps left over for the not-so-academic ones, hence the increase in NEETS, young adult unemployment, lack of trades and manual skilled workers, etc.

The rot set in during the 70s when Grammars and SecMods were merged with the emphasis on the academic side of things. After all, we were promised "a grammar education for all", which was basically an academic education for all, with no thought at all for those more suited to manual skills.

Thanks Commander That's a really lovely encouraging post.

I'm not sure what PFA is. They do a lot of practical stuff: cooking, woodwork, sewing etc. Loads of PSA (personal and social education) tailored to their needs. Loads of school trips to fun places. Its an excellent life for a 12 year old boy really.
He does chess club and school council with the mainstream kids and he'll be starting modern studies in a mainstream class in May. My only niggle is that while the unit talk a good game about access to mainstream experiences, they're really much more comfortable with facilitating that for PE or Home Economics than....say... History. (which is one of DS's special interests)
I've come to terms with the idea that he'll follow his geeky interests as a hobby for now, and as an academic pursuit two years later than his peers, if at all.

That's really nice of you to say that DD has an exceptional brain. She certainly shows a lot of grit which will serve her well in later life.

Its been an interesting journey because they are probably quite close in academic ability. Watching how it works out for them both, I can see the pros and cons of being the smartest kid in the SEN Unit versus being the struggling kid in the mainstream class. The expectations on them are very different.

Not true.

I didn’t have the support I needed, I needed a push, I am autistic but undiagnosed back then, my parents and teachers should’ve noticed why I was always “ill” and it’s because I couldn’t cope with the workload and social side

I believe the point of the thread is that it is not always a case of not trying hard.

I actually do think this was OP’s point @Singaporeannoodle.

Unfortunately that’s not quite what she said.

It is the sentiment reflected in her title, but she then outlined arguing with ‘an idiot’ who said that some kids don’t do well because they don’t work harder?

I mean…some kids could work harder and do better. That’s not exactly a controversial thing to say. A bit more study wouldn’t go amiss in many cases, especially as they get older and face exam years.

The fact that there are a lot of other reasons children don’t do well in school doesn’t negate that.

I think OP made her point clumsily and caused confusion.

I'm really not sure tbh. I think they could have checked I was doing my homework because I was not (and for some reason I wasn't getting into trouble for that at school) and perhaps helped me with revision a bit (I help DD by asking her questions) but coursework was my big let down and I understand that's not done so much any more? (I'm not in the UK any more so different education system). I could have done with being nagged more to do my coursework but that wouldn't work with all children, not everyone responds well to nagging (probably most people don't but I do)

For some children they absolutely could do better if they tried harder, I was one of them - had the potential to do so much better but I was lazy and didn't want to put the effort in

Looking back, what could your parents have done about this, do you think?

For some children they absolutely could do better if they tried harder, I was one of them - had the potential to do so much better but I was lazy and didn't want to put the effort in.
My DD is one that improved in science, which she finds difficult, greatly when she started putting effort in (and more recently stopped putting in so much effort, for understandable reasons*, and nearly failed a physics exam she likely could have got an 8 or more in if she had put her usual amount of effort)

For other children they won't be able to do better no matter how hard they try because they don't have the aptitude, and some have too much stressors in their life to be able to put the effort in.

*illness and stress so I don't blame her at all and it's only one exam out of many she will have so I won't put more stress on her by making a big deal out of it

I believe the point of the thread is that it is not always a case of not trying hard. Some people just don't have it no matter how hard they try.
I wasn't a dedicated student I barely revised and did my GCSEs six months pregnant still got good grades.

I knew someone who revised every possible moment and still failed every exam.
The sad truth is intelligence doesn't come from just working hard some people are just naturally smarter than others

This is compounded by a bigger issue in my opinion - which is that a lot of people actively disliking intelligence and balk at encouraging family to be ‘elite’ or ‘above’

How often do you hear it? Clever clogs, swot, teachers pet, suck up, airs and graces, too clever by half, thinks their better than others, smarty pants etc. etc.

So many people think clever people are out to trick them, con them, take control of the world with their ‘schemes’ or, worst of all, look down on them. Demonstrable proof, evidence and scientific basis are all dirty words/thoughts.

I'm not saying everyone should doff their caps or just defer without question. But there was a time when the less educated at least acknowledged the fact the educated knew things and that education was to be valued and strived for. Almost every study ever done equates education with better outcomes, most especially for women.

Children reflect their parents 90% of the time, if they make no effort, their parents don’t encourage them too, if they think it’s not important, their parents have in some way demonstrated that belief to them; and you can’t suggest self improvement to the parents - that would be you insulting them and looking down, rather than a perfectly useful, helpful suggestion.

Ultimately, I’m saying a lot of parents need to take a long hard look at themselves as to why their children don’t / won’t try in schools.
They don’t want to take that look.

To me success is 90% hard work, 10% intelligence. I know someone who left school just before A-levels, didn't go to university but he's doing super super well in the USA due to hard work and grit.

Absolutely.

At times, kids with SEN are the hardest working in the class. They have to apply themselves so much more than the quiet clever kids. And yet they don't achieve.

So no. Working hard is frequently not the route to success others insist it is.

Yes they had to start their college qualification at level 1 instead of level 3 so spent two extra years at college, they are doing ok now though

Your poor friend. That's really sad.

Our school system is set up almost entirely for kids who are academic. That is a very narrow skill set.

For kids who do not fit this, they are either unmotivated as they are all day every day being asked to do tasks they have no interest in and no aptitude for. Or they try but with all the effort in the world they will never do that well.

Then of course there are kids who have learning difficulties ( my son is dyslexic - a learning system based on reading and writing presents challenges to him other kids don't face), those who come from abusive households and a whole raft of other factors.

Yeah, of course some kids will do better if they try harder. Others do really well despite doing very little. Others will try hard and still not do well ( this was me at maths). Others will give up trying as they are in a system where they are square pegs being forced in round holes.

Not unreasonable. Some people just don't have it. I suppose I wasn't a perfect student I barely revised for my GCSEs and did them while six months pregnant and got some pretty good grades.
Knew a friend who spent every spare moment revising and still failed every exam. Genetics play a big part

My brother wasn’t great in school, he missed a LOT of school in his earlier years due to cancer treatment and it was the 90s so never really caught up or got much support. He had dyslexia and probably some other mild learning difficulties that just made learning very difficult with him. My mother put so much effort into his education and tutored him every night for months and months prior to his exams and he done ok. But he was very good a PE was very physical and loved being active. My mum saw that end helped guide him to a career as a scaffolder. He works offshore now and makes a fortune. Much more than me with my university degree and good exam results! Nobody would look at his exam results and say he “done well” in school. But with my mother’s guidance he has “done well” in life.

@AdaStewart

I learned that with the right teacher & encouragement, anyone can do well.

I agree with that. A really good teacher can make all the difference. I remember a girl in our form (Joanne) who was the form "idiot" - always messing around, never doing any work, disruptive, etc and basically a pain in the arse to be around. She wasn't nasty nor a bully, but she just clearly couldn't be arsed to do any work.

In fourth year, we both chose History for O Level, and because of the block choices, it was a very low enrolled block option - there were only about ten of us in the class as most people wanting to do History had chosen it in a different block so they could do Geography too, so we were timetabled into a tiny classroom, and a group of ten "misfits" as it were who didn't want to do both Humanities. When I saw Joanne was in our class, my heart sank. When the teacher showed us her seating plan and Joanne was sat next to me, I despaired! But the teacher was "old school", a matronly unmarried woman in her sixties who right from the first lesson made it clear she'd accept no nonsense - she had a "presence" or "aura" about her that commanded authority. Of course, Joanne would start messing around, not working in lessons, not handing in homework, etc., but unlike other teachers, our history teacher didn't start ranting and raving during the lesson, but kept asking Joanne to stay behind for "a quick word". After a few weeks, there was a clear transformation in the history lessons - she'd stop messing around and would actually do some work. She was the same idiot in other lessons, but was different in history. Over the weeks, the teacher turned out to be really inspirational for us all, really brought the subject to life, showed almost unlimited enthusiasm for what was a pretty dry topic. Even Joanne would start participating in group discussions, etc. After the two years, it turned out that History was the only O level that Joanne had passed!

It just showed how a good inspirational teacher can turn around a "poor" pupil if they've got enough "tools" in their ability and experience.

”doing well at school” is very subjective though. Of course not everyone is very academic and could be doctors, lawyers, engineers, and accountants even with all the effort in the world. Someone who gets middle of the road grades but very well in certain areas that they are interested in and goes on to have a career in that field has “done well” in school given that they have gotten themselves the qualifications and grades to do a job that they enjoy. Such as someone doing well is wood works and maths and not great in other subjects but goes on to be a joiner. Someone really interested in home economics and goes on to become a chief. University and academia is not the only route to success. Some of the most successful people I know are tradespeople!

It sounds like you have chosen the best solution for your son. Does the SEN provision offer practical learning and PFA? Education is honestly so much more than just academic (although confession I am an acdemic type of leaner). Hopefully he shall find his talent and passion in life. Your daughter managing dyslexia in two languages that is an exceptional brain just one that processes differently. I hope she gets the reasonable adjustments she needs to succeed.

@BoredZelda

I chucked out the old stuff that wasn’t important and when I was asking for something which seemed useless to them, I told them why I was teaching it and how it would help. For every single class I had near perfect attendance, right up to the very last. We need to stop focusing on just getting a high grade and have students work smarter not harder.

That's a refreshing read and we need more of that kind of attitude from our educators.

My son did a Financial Maths degree and was really unimpressed at the "teaching" which he says was all outdated and tedious. He showed me some Economics lecture notes which were discussing events 20 years ago, nothing at all more recent, as the notes had never been updated and were just regurgitated year after year for each new cohort. He found the whole degree course utterly tedious. When fellow students asked questions in lectures, the lecturers often couldn't answer as they were just "delivering" the lectures which had been prepared by others many years ago. He got his First degree after the three years, but decided not to carry on for his Msc nor Phd which had been his plan, and was glad to leave once he got his Bsc as he was utterly drained and fed up by the tedium of it all. Now he's doing his professional Actuarial exams and is rejuvenated with studying etc with what he regards as far higher quality teaching and resources from the professional training firm doing online live lectures, relevant examples and questions, one to one online support, etc.

I had a stint at our local FE college teaching accounting for the AAT professional exams for a few years. The college were short of a teacher so reached out for me to do a term as I was on one of their committees co-opted by my employer at the time as the senior partner of the firm I worked at was a governor or similar of the college. I ended up doing it for a few years, despite not having any teaching experience/qualifications. I couldn't believe the crap material they handed me to use to teach them - a whole box of scrappy worksheets, ancient text books, etc., some of which I recognised from my studying days 20 years earlier! No effort whatsoever made by the college to produce interesting/useful training/studying material. Worse still, that some of it contained glaringly obvious mistakes and it really wasn't a "good look" to be handing out worksheets with transaction dates of the 1970s when doing teaching in the 90s! I ignored the lot of it and used a combination of the official modern text books they were told to buy for the course (BPP I seem to remember), along with a modern text book I bought myself from a different modern provider for the same course (Foulks Lynch I seem to remember who were a big player at that time). Between the two books, and lots of my own examples from my years of experience, I re-designed the course week by week as we went through it - I was basically a week ahead, writing my own worked examples, slides, etc and using the alternative text book to base questions homework and worked questions in class. I got pretty close to 100% attendance, very high engagement with homework, and very high pass rates. The college kept asking me to do other modules but I didn't have time for more than one module.

Rather than random questions for different examples, I started the first lecture with introducing a fictitious company making fictitious products, and built upon it, week by week, ledger by ledger, until by the end of the course, we had a full set of accounts where the class could identify where all the figures had come from, and which were "real" to them, as they'd got to know the suppliers and customers names, the major suppliers and customers, the staff names and roles, the products, how the products were made, what components were bought from where, how much they individually cost, etc. If I say so myself, it was quite a master piece. But bringing it all to life and giving meaning to every single figure really gave "ownership" to the class. I appreciate they were either adults or nearly adults (age range was 17 through to mid 50s) so different from school age children, but I really felt a sense of engagement from them, even the youngest who'd basically just left school.